Newsletter

The Editor's Desk: Are they ready for some football?

It’s no secret that state legislators like getting tickets to sporting events involving Georgia’s public colleges and universities. As noted in an Associated Press report late last week, an early version of a lobbying reform bill passed by lawmakers this year included an exception that would have allowed colleges and universities to continue handing out free sports tickets.

That provision was eventually taken out of the bill, and as of Jan. 1, 2014, lobbyists will be prohibited from providing lawmakers with tickets to collegiate sporting events, unless the lawmakers pay at least face value for the tickets.

Interestingly, last week’s AP story notes that state Sen. David Shafer, R-Duluth, “wants advice from Statehouse lawyers on whether employees of Georgia’s higher education system are legally considered lobbyists.”

“If they are not lobbyists,” the AP report continues, “they would not be subject to the spending rules.”

And just like that, Shafer and his colleagues would be free to accept whatever largesse that “representatives” of University System of Georgia institutions might want to bestow on them.

But let’s go to the videotape, shall we? The lobbying reform legislation passed by the legislature — with Shafer’s affirmative vote every time the issue came in front of the state Senate — defines a lobbyist, in part, as any “person who, either individually or as an employee of another person receives or anticipates receiving more than $250.00 per calendar year in compensation or reimbursement or payment of expenses specifically for undertaking to promote or oppose the passage of any legislation by the General Assembly, or any committee of either chamber or a joint committee thereof, or the approval or veto of legislation by the Governor ... .”

Now, let’s wander over to the University of Georgia’s website, where we find an entire Office of Government Relations, which explains that it “works with elected officials, executive branch leaders and other universities to develop and implement strategies and programs to achieve public funding goals, and to foster positive and effective ongoing relationships, while improving the understanding of and support for the University’s academic, research, technological, and public service goals.”

That’s a perfectly legitimate undertaking on the part of the university. It’s not hard, though, to draw a direct line from what the Office of Government Relations describes as its mission to what the legislature has seen fit to define as lobbying, effective Jan. 1. And if you’d like to wander over to the Open Georgia website, http://www.open.ga.gov, you’ll discover that at least a couple of the university’s government relations staff members receive more than $250 annually in compensation or reimbursement.

Even if there is a way to twist the letter of the law to Shafer’s liking, the fact that he’s trying to preserve his access to collegiate sports tickets clearly runs counter to the spirit of the law — not that that means anything when we’re talking about a trip to a college football bowl game.

Which brings us to another issue, at least in my mind. There’s a near-100-percent chance that the University of Georgia Bulldogs will be involved in postseason play on either New Year’s Day or afterward. That being the case, will lawmakers be precluded from attending that game, given that the new lobbying law becomes effective on Jan. 1? Or will the fact that lawmakers invited to attend the game likely will be invited, and have tickets in hand, sometime before Jan. 1, render that point moot?

I’ll poke around for an answer to that question, and will let you know what I find out.